Ant-Man will not be made. Marvel can talk about it all they want, but its just too risky a move, especially with a new studio.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BatJeff7786

I don't see an Ant-Man movie being successful.

Based on....? I love it when people throw this kind of bad mojo out there with nothing to back it up. Those are the same comments people made about Iron Man, remember? "He's a second or third tier hero" "It's too much of a risk because Marvel is a new studio"

I call shenanigans. There's nothing about the story and powers of Ant Man that indicate it would suck. Get older/better actors, do a decent job writing it, make sure the powers / environment are taken seriously - and ANY superhero can do well.

That's not saying there's NO risk. Yes, Ant Man is a third-tier hero who should get a smaller budget. When you've got a smaller budget it's even more critical to get things right...but I just don't get people who jump to negativity - especially after IM did so well.

I doubt Ant Man will even be chosen to be in the Avengers movie, tbh, but if they do the movie I'm betting it works.

I question your comparing AM to IM. IM has always been the more popular character and he ranks right up there with Cap and Spidey.

In terms of the general public, not really. Iron Man has never been as popular as Cap or Spider-man until now. I do agree though that IM isn't quite comparable to Ant Man.

Now yes, I will admit, when I first saw the Iron Man commercials, I thought "hmm it could be a Fantastic Four, or it could be very good." I didn't know if Iron man would be too goofy or not, but I knew that Iron Man had loads of potential for a few reasons.

*For one, a superhero like Iron Man has never really been done before. Robocop is the closest you can compare it to, and even then it's still pretty different. It's new, and it's not the traditional kind of Superhero.

*Let's face it, the general audience love big explosions and guns, which is why they love movies like Transformers and Die Hard. Iron Man has both of these, and it's a Superhero movie, and superhero movies are a popular trend at the moment.

*And finally, Iron Man had a lot of talented actors to back it up.

Ant man has a few things against it right off the bat.

*He's basically unknown to the general public. The average movie-goer has no idea who Ant man is.

*His powers aren't as flashy as Iron Man's. He doesn't have a lot of cool guns or a cool looking techy suit. And their not as unique as a Spider-man character who flips around the city like a gymnast.

Now, Ant Man could turn out to be very good if written well. A good writer can change everything. The Flash is boring as heck when all they have him do is run fast, but when you start exploring ideas like having him vibrate so fast he can phase through a wall, or gain enough momentum that can level a building in a punch, then he becomes more interesting. If the Ant Man writer gets creative with Ant Man's powers then it could end up being very good. But it'll be very tricky.

2-3 is a bit much. Go for 2 for IM and Cap, then move on to Avengers I say.

Well, I think they probably could get away with Cap only having one solo film before the Avengers. Hulk could go either way, but I would prefer that atleast getting one sequel. Thor would need a sequel bringing him to modern day Earth simply because the film Vaughn wants to make is set in Asgard and medieval Scandanavia. And I would like to see Favreau make his two sequels to Iron Man first.

__________________
"Is it fear or courage that compels you, fleshling?"

Well, I think they probably could get away with Cap only having one solo film before the Avengers. Hulk could go either way, but I would prefer that atleast getting one sequel. Thor would need a sequel bringing him to modern day Earth simply because the film Vaughn wants to make is set in Asgard and medieval Scandanavia. And I would like to see Favreau make his two sequels to Iron Man first.

I agree, Cap doesn't really need more then one movie before Avengers because (especially if they follow the way the first Ultimates book went) a big part of the Avengers plot will be dealing with Cap and how he's adjusting to being unfrozen.

Ant-Man doesn't have star-quality abilities to be made into a successful blockbuster.

Oh, he can shrink? Cool...
Basically, what a general audience would think.

Honestly, comparing Iron Man and Ant-Man is pretty ludicrous. Iron Man is one of Marvel's heavy hitters whereas Ant-Man has only been truly successful in his affiliation with Avengers. If Pym wasn't part of the Avengers, do you honestly think he would have lasted this long in the comics?

I'm not saying he's a worthless character. He would be perfect in an Avengers film, but his character doesn't require a backstory in its own film.

I, for one, think that THOR would be awesome as a cameo in Iron Man II BUT I think it should be after he has his solo film. If a movie patron goes and sees it who is not familiar with him, they wouldn't get it. If he has his set up film, then his cameo would make more sense. My problem is the casting of THOR. The other problem with THOR is the main villain is Loki. Most people would think he is fighting THE MASK (Jim Carrey film. The Norse God was imprisoned in the mask OR they will think of Kevin Smith's DOGMA, Matt Damon played Loki). Not sure how they would go for that. Touchy subjects all around with THOR.

Ant-Man, I see as a bomb and comparison to "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids," if they don't do it right.

It would be cool if they had the New Avengers in there with Iron Man, Thor and Hulk with Wolverine, Spider-man and Captain America. All original actors as well would rock. Doubtful, but wishful thinking.

__________________
"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
-Verbal Kint